>>> - the name of the class can be Complex or ComplexNumber >>> Specifically I don't like isComplex, many objects could respond true >>> because complicated; >>> isComplexNumber is much more explicit. >>> We could also think of having complex expressions in a symbolic >>> algebra, and isComplexNumber would be true only for a literal value.. >>> >>> What I could eventually do is publish an old Complex in package >>> Complex for backard compatibility and an updated ComplexNumber in a >>> Math-Complex package... >>> >>> How many of you use Complex ? >>> What do you think of these proposals ? >>> > > I do not have a strong position between Complex and ComplexNumber. I think > Complex is not that bad.
But I think we should be careful about namespace consumption. "Complex" is very broad and ambiguous and could potentially create headaches for other domains that want to define a class named Complex.
